Don has apparently been using his profession to promote mountain biking, charging others for his services, but not the mountain bikers. If mountain biking is truly a "legitimate form of recreation", as the Sierra Club claims, why is it necessary to use underhanded means to promote it? Because, FRANKLY, it is not defensible by any rational, honest means! The destruction of wildlife and wildlife habitat, for frivolous reasons, is simply not defensible!

Mike

Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 21:05:15 -0700

From: Don Weir <donweir@telusplanet.net>

Subject: Professional Disciplinary Committees and the Role of Judges in Canada

It appears yet again I was not clear.

Jim Hasenauer has asked for a docket number and the complainant for the

action that was brought against me. I would like everyone to know that the

proceeding that was brought against was not a trial.

In Canada and most nations of the British Commonwealth and in most

jurisdictions of the United States acts have been passed for the

self-governance of professions. In Canada professions that are governed

under such acts include physicians and surgeons, solicitors and barristers,

engineers, geologists, geophysicists, psychologists, sociologists, nurses,

foresters, biologists and many others.

Parliament and the various legislative assemblies, that when it came to

ensuring that the public good is protected, it would be best that groups of

peers should govern themselves. They do this by standards of practice and

conduct. The first group of peers to have this responsibility granted to

them was the navy and military professions (in particular artillery and the

engineering corps), followed closely by legal, medical and engineering

professions.

These professions modeled their governance on the way the Roman Army

governed itself during the Empire and the clergy has governed itself since

the late Roman Empire as per the tradition of the synod Nicenea (Sp.?) that

was held during the reign of Constantine the Great. For a full discourse on

these matters I would recommend the works of Scullard (Professor Emeritus of

Oxford University).

When it comes to disciplinary procedures most professional associations

utilize a panel to make judgments. In the 1950's several controversial

decisions were made and recourse was made to Her Majesty's Courts by both

professionals and aggrieved clients. The roles of provincial court judges

were brought into certain cases to ensure that the rights of all parties

were respected.

Today a panel of five peers acts as a jury with a panel president that may

or may not be judge.

This does not mean that public does not have recourse to the courts, this

arrangement is seen as a way to cut down on the need for such expensive

undertakings. It was such a panel that heard the complaint against me.

These panels have the right, privilege and obligation to deny the right of

any practitioner to practice that act unhonourably, against the best

interest of the profession or against the public good.

As to the person who brought the complaint against me: This person, I

believe, has had enough in the way of penalties. This person, as a director

of a provincial cycling association, has been found in contempt of their own

profession in not bringing the insurance fiasco of all provinces to light.

This person has been sanctioned severely by being put on probation for five

years. A member in good standing must sanction all of this person's

actions.

Therefore I decline to identify the individual. If the IMBA board wishes me

to identify the provincial bicycling associations that were cited in the

complaint I will require a notarized letter citing such a request signed by

all board members.

Don

Donald V. Weir

#303, 9920-90 Ave, NW

Edmonton, AB

T6E 2T3

Canada

Ph. 780-439-5130

Fax 780-992-1473

email donweir@telusplanet.net